Yesterday an Australian court in Perth sentenced to nine years prison a
man who pleaded guilty to the charge of conspiring to terrorism, i.e.
joining a Muslim terrorist group and threatening to blow up the Israeli
embassy in Australia.

How convenient for the judiciary that the man – after offering the
standard evidence of Muslim conspiratorial claptrap – then pleaded
guilty, thereby avoiding a close scrutiny of Australia’s security
service, ASIO, and the Federal Police’s role in this matter. During his
submission the man claimed his warnings to ASIO of a possible terrorist
attack in Australia were ignored. He will now spend a maximum of four
and a half years in jail, and then with time already served may be out
in under that. Not bad for a self-confessed, aimless and vagrant
alcoholic who became abstinent only when he converted to Islam. I extend
my sympathy to Mrs Roach who had begun to love him when he converted to
Islam.

After the sentence was handed down it was good to see prosecutor, judge
and justice minister admit that there was a conspiracy operating here –
a Muslim conspiracy, a terrorist conspiracy!

Interestingly, when I claim that a conspiracy of another nature brought
about the 9:11 tragedy in the USA, I hear nothing but howling from those
who believe in the Muslim terrorist conspiracy. They are true believers,
while those that claim it was not a Muslim terrorist conspiracy – but
rather an internal US job used as a pretext to save Israel from
extinction - are labelled deniers!

This reminds me how much of the 9:11 talk and writings that is flooding
the Internet has become a religious matter. The believers in the
conspiracy theory – that Arabs/Muslims did it – base their argument on
this non-proven premise that Osama bin Laden‘s organisation did it.

Like most religious arguments which are based on the premise that there
is a God, the Muslim terrorist argument rests on the premise that the
cause of, for example, the 9:11 tragedy, is Muslim terrorism.

‘Holocaust’ matters are also based on the premise that ‘it happened’.

Critical voices that question the physical authenticity of the 9:11
premise are as yet not silenced through legal prosecution-persecution,
as have critical voices of the physical ‘Holocaust’ story. Thanks to the
Internet’s free flow of information the official/orthodox version of
9:11 is still open for debate because assertions made about the physical
happenings just don’t add up. The same problem is now developing for the
upholders of the 9:11 terrorist theory as faced by those who uphold the
‘Holocaust’ theory – how to deflect from a physical analysis of the
alleged murder weapon/site. But the 9:11 sceptics are well on the way to
becoming potential ‘terrorists’ themselves if they do not conform to the
official version of events. Forcing individuals into silence is a show
of power, political and legal, which in turn rest on economic power.
Then, ultimately, it is a matter of a society’s leaders’ moral and
intellectual integrity.

Yesterday, also, our Prime Minister stated that as regards the Iraq
torture matter he did not know about it and the security forces
briefings had misled him about it. If I had the power to effect events,
I would then charge our PM with being a dictator and sheet home the
blame to him, as was done with Iraq’s dictator Saddam Hussein who was
answerable to all the forms of abuse that occurred under his watch. Our
PM escapes the noose by claiming that he was wrongly advised. Poor Adolf
Hitler and his generals couldn’t pull that swiftie and blame someone
below themselves for things that happened!

Empirical-factual evidence in ‘Holocaust’ and 9:11 tragedy

Empirical evidence is vital to settling doubts about assertions
concerning physical events whose premises are unproven – such as the
‘Holocaust’ and the 9:11 tragedy. I say this with qualifications because
it is a criminal matter in Germany, and other countries to doubt any
aspects of the ‘Holocaust’. As Mannheim’s public prosecutor, Klein,
gleefully stated to me in 1999, ‘The Holocaust is set in concrete and
beyond debate – from the lowest to the highest court in Germany’!

Anyone writing about these events needs unfettered access to physical
evidence, something that was denied the 9:11 sceptics – and is still
legally denied to the ‘Holocaust’ sceptics - when the authorities
hurriedly removed vital matters before anyone had a chance of
forensically analysing the various plane-crash sites.

Being a sceptic should not be a criminal matter because absolute
knowledge of the physical world is not possible. That is why our
knowledge of the physical world is forever growing. It is different with
knowledge that we create within our mind - that’s absolute in a way!
Hence an open enquiry needs to have an element of doubt if we wish to
achieve some approximate or relative certainty on physical matters. And
the worry with 9:11 is that dissenting voices have been marginalized and
‘forced’ to conform to the prevailing ‘Arab-Muslim terrorist’ version of
events.

I need not reiterate what happens to those who refuse to believe in the
orthodox ‘Holocaust’ story because the current prime example is
Revisionist Ernst Zündel who has been imprison since 5 February 2003 –
just because he will not accept the premise that ‘it happened’, and
demands physical proof of ‘that it happened’.

Still, intelligent and critical voices will never be silenced on any
issues – and truth will out, thanks to scientific analysis and thanks to
the still free flow of information via the Internet. That’s where an
individual will find freedom to think and to speak unhindered, but
hopefully in a civilized way about anything at all. Again with Robert
Faurisson, for the individual Revisionist the situation looks bleak, but
for Revisionism itself the dawning of the day is inevitable.

Revisionism

After ten years of focusing on matters ‘Holocaust’,
after the failed April 2004 Revisionist Conference at Sacramento, and in
view of the appalling internal squabbles before and after that
non-event, there are now voices joining Professor Robert Faurisson
singing a Revisionist swan-song – it’s Götterdämmerung – Twilight of the
Gods.

Those who opposed the staging of the conference, unfortunately, had
nothing to offer in its place, nothing but empty rhetoric dreamt up in
personal isolation. I hasten to add that I am not decrying isolationists
as such because most worthy intellectual impulses arise in isolation.

How does this relate to Revisionism at a movement? Some isolationists
have for decades claimed that if a snake is attacking your value system,
then you needs to go out and chop off its head in order to guarantee
personal survival.

Although I understand such comments to mean that this is a call to
action, my personal endeavour has always been to resolve disputes
through dialogue rather than through us-them confrontation. Perhaps this
is because of my having been raised on a farm, and of having spent much
time in the Australian bush where any walk could bring me into contact
with a snake. There was then never any urgency for me to strike at a
fleeing snake because it is at home there – and I had been the
invader/visitor.
However, when snakes venture to the homestead, and during the setting
sun laze about on some footpath that offers them some fleeting warmth
before the evening chill sets in, they have to learn that this is not
their home and that this home is defended – to the death.

It has always amused me to hear my critics claim that our work is
irrelevant because we have not posed the ultimate question: Power!

Most societies operate a legal system that guarantees social stability
and furthers the interests of the political elites. In this respect
Australia is no exception, and my various ventures into our law courts
attest to that where I have battled undesirable impulses against my
person. My Federal Court of Australia gag-order arose out of an
uncontested case because I could not find a single legal counsel that
was prepared to take on Australia’s powerful Jewish lobby – and I was
not fool enough to defend myself because it would have been a no-match
situation. How can I compete against a Queens Counsel who has all the
necessary legal arguments at his finger tips? And a judge, in order to
hand down a ‘safe’ judgment, will take into consideration only the legal
arguments, even if the matters of fact canvassed by myself held sway
over him for a moment.
The gag-order under which I have operated since 2003 indicates how
powerless I am against the Australian Jewish lobby. It is much the same
in Germany where the current ‘political occupying power’ has control of
the judiciary. More of that below.

So, here is my brief thought about power:

German Pain – Jewish Power

Jewish Pain – German Power

Creating this German-Jewish dialectic process has some individuals
battling to bring about a synthesis whereby Germans and Jews become
harmoniously intertwined. Unfortunately this cannot be because certainly
from the Jewish perspective it is highly undesirable to lose the Jewish
exclusivist identity, and non-Jews are there to be subjugated. The
cultural divide is also too great because German culture and German
spirit would find itself stifled and reduced somewhat by Jewish thought
and culture. The German free spirit cannot thrive within the
Jewish-imposed mental dictatorship.

The dialectic also raises the conflict between nomadic and sedentary
forms of society, between nationalism and internationalism, between
separation and integration, and how it is expressed in religious
thought, and much more.

Horst Mahler’s current endeavours in a Berlin court aims to liberate the
Germans from this dialectic process that has been imposed upon them.
Hence Mahler’s exclamations that his work in court is for those Germans
who still want to be Germans. His aim is to create the German
Volksgemeinschaft as a national unity where a monarchical system
operates, rather than a republican-democratic-multicultural system. The
latter is open to abuse because the concept of responsibility resides
with behind-the-scene political lobby groups and not with members of a
local community. He sees this as the only alternative to the current
state Germans find themselves in - an occupation government imposed by
the Anglo-American-Zionist allies on Germans since 1945, after the Third
Reich’s representatives accepted an unconditional ceasefire.

We are currently witnessing another occupation by the
Anglo-American-Zionist Forces (AAZF) – of Iraq, and this is proving more
difficult than was the occupation of Germany sixty-odd years ago. Also,
the Iraqis are not falling for that freedom and democracy thing because
they must know that the AAZF form of democracy means military occupation
and economic-predatory capitalist exploitation, something that still
persists in Germany, Japan, South Korea, et al.

Unlike Iraq at the moment, Germany’s unconditional surrender and total
subjugation of German life through a massive re-education program, did
bear fruit. Germans are so vile to their own culture and to their dead –
self-hating Germans! - that a fundamental characteristic of any healthy
society has been abandoned: honouring the memory of their dead and
fallen soldiers, and of remembering the injustices perpetrated upon
their women by the occupying forces at the end of the war. Instead,
anything non-German is celebrated as superior, and German history is
distorted by a constant emphasis on uncontested ‘Holocaust’ mythology.

If moves are seen to be afoot to challenge this ‘Holocaust’
straightjacket in Germany, they are quickly nipped in the bud, and this
happens at all levels of German society where the spectre of evil Nazism
is used to castrate Germans who want to be Germans.

The following item illustrates this well:

Protesters try to halt modern art show over owner's link to Nazi war
criminal Mercedes heir vows to go ahead with plan to exhibit his
collection

So what’s new as far as matters of German re-assertion is concerned – of
German power rather than German pain? The academic rejection of the
Flick-endowed chair at Oxford University only happened in 1995, and it
indicates how insidious German hatred still is, especially among the
wilting academics who are living on a lie.

All too often individual academics and publicists will state that
Germany still hasn’t come to terms with its past because it does not
permit a free and open debate on its ‘Nazi past’. Dr Wilhelm Stäglich in
1983 had his doctorate revoked from the University of Göttingen because
he wrote the definitive The Auschwitz Myth. That’s a powerful message to
any academic to let that subject go. Some years ago Dr Stäglich advised
me that all it needs is a courageous judge to stop the nonsense that
passes off as justice when it comes to questioning the ‘Holocaust’.
Perhaps Berlin’s Justice Faust, the judge who is hearing the charges
against Horst Mahler, will rise to the occasion and exonerate Mahler of
all allegations that public prosecutor Krüger has brought against
Mahler.

Likewise with Justice Adam, the Mannheim judge whose task it is to
organize my re-trial, possibly set down for July 2004. Justice Adam is
facing a legal dilemma. Although I stated to him, in writing, that I am
quite prepared to return to Mannheim for my re-trial, a snare developed.
He assigned a lawyer whose task was to defend me in court. I objected to
that and asked for Horst Mahler to be my lawyer. Soon after, the Berlin
public prosecutor initiated a ‘Berufsverbot’ for Mahler, which was then
granted and so Mahler is not permitted to work as a lawyer anymore.

On this happening I advised Justice Adam that without Horst Mahler as my
defence counsel I now have to re-think my willingness to participate in
a re-trial. I also posed a number of questions about the German legal
process and how it is different to the Common Law where truth is
generally a defence. Add to that the fact that I have legally been
barred from entering any European Union country, how am I to get into
Germany for the trial. I am still awaiting Justice Adam’s reply.

Unzumutbarkeit
Meanwhile, on 28 May 2004 I received an email letter from my
court-assigned defence counsel, Michael Rosenthal. Therein he states
that he has advised Justice Adam of his unwillingness to represent me,
and thus he wishes to be relieved of his task as my court-assigned
defence counsel. He also states that if this does not happen, then he
will adopt the position that my legal counsel Ludwig Bock adopted during
my November 1999 Mannheim trial – sit there and remain silent.

In 2000 legal counsel Michael Rosenthal agreed to take my case to the
appeal stage at Karlsruhe, and he explained in his 27 May 2004 letter to
Justice Adam, that the appeal stage concerns itself with legal arguments
only, and not with matters of fact. Rosenthal claims that Justice Adam
cannot expect him to defend an accused because in any spirited defence
legal counsel would have to grapple with the problem of possibly
criminalizing himself when it gets to talking about matters of fact.
Barrister Ludwig Bock had vigorously defended Günter Deckert before a
Mannheim court, and state prosecutor Hans-Heiko Klein immediately threw
a writ against Bock for having moved too close to the Revisionist
mindset. Bock had to pay a DM9.000 fine!

State prosecutor Krüger is doing the same thing to Horst Mahler in
Berlin. Every time Mahler elucidates a point wherein he needs to
elaborate on matters ‘Holocaust’ Krüger jumps up and warns him that what
Mahler is stating in court will attract another charge. Mahler, of
course, realizes that Krüger just does not have the mental capacity to
understand Mahler’s argument, and this constant interrupting the
argument’s flow is not helpful to gain an understanding and advancement
of the argument. But that is, of course, Krüger’s intention – to impose
his kind of mutated mindset onto the world!

Back to my pending case in Germany. Somewhat disturbing is Michael
Rosenthal’s comment to the judge about my having rejected him on account
of his having Jewish ancestry! This is a nonsense claim, and I wonder
why he did this. Before the appeal I had even met a person in Germany
who spoke highly of Michael Rosenthal’s capacity as a defence counsel,
and so I had no objection for Rosenthal to do the appeal on my behalf.
This pulling out the Jewish card is what the quest for power is all
about – when it suits – German Pain: Jewish Gain.

Ethnic Cleansing of German Territories

And now to some interesting material that comes from the
Hausner Foundation, 28 Concord Drive, Oak Brook, Il 60523, USA. Email:
medical@elmed.com

For a number of years I have been following the written and video output
of this organisation that primarily concerns itself with post-war
Sudetendeutsche concerns, and also of those Germans who were forced to
flee from East Germany – not to be confused with Central Germany
/Mitteldeutschland, formerly the GDR/DDR.

The foundation’s head, Dr Karl Hausner, is not associated with any kind
of ‘Holocaust’ revisionism, but rather looks at the issue of historical
truth in the following terms:

Truth and Wisdom
If you are seriously ill, you are advised to consult at least two,
preferably three, physicians independently.
If you wish to purchase a major piece of equipment, such as an
automobile, a house, etc. or want to remodel your home, you should get
three estimates. You will be surprised about the difference.
If you wish to know historic truth, you must at least consult five
different essays on the same subject, preferably produced in different
countries and, if possible, one or two must come from neutral sources.
Remember, our public schools and the primary media are tools of politics
and/or government. History is written by the mighty and cultivated by
groups who benefit from it.

The above appears on the back cover of the foundation’s 2002 published
book

This Too Happened
Ethnic Cleansing Happened Before Kosovo…
One Hundred Witnesses Of Exodus, Expulsions And Deportations
By Rudi Maskus

The contents of this 152-page book should be compulsory
reading for any German public prosecutor who still entertains a sick
delight to stifle open debate on what Germans themselves endured during
World War Two. I am thinking here of the Horst Mahler case in Berlin
where public prosecutor Krüger suffers from deficiency thinking whenever
anything German, not viewed through the distortions of the ‘Holocaust’
glasses, comes his way.

From memory it was Krüger who conducted the 1999 trial of Ingrid Weckert
who faced charges for minimizing the harm done by the National Socialist
‘regime’ during World War Two, and at which I was present. What had she
done? Ingrid Weckert had written an article in which she compared the
work of two diary writers who had spent time at the Auschwitz
concentration camp; one writing positively and the other writing a
horror story about time spent there.
Prosecutor Krüger asked Ingrid Weckert why she had done this work.
Spontaneously I interjected and said that she did this to find out the
truth of the matter. I was immediately warned that if I again
interrupted the proceedings through such an interjection I would be
fined. I asked how high the fine would be. Krüger responded that he
would tell me how much – ‘das verrat ich Ihnen nicht’. To that I asked
him if he has secrets in this open court – ‘Geheimnisse im Gericht’.
Upon that the judge stopped the proceedings and cleared the court and
asked me for my name and other matters. I willingly offered this
information, but when I asked for his name, the judge refused to give it
to me. Subsequently I enquired at the court office where I received the
answer. Then, during a break in the proceedings, I was able to approach
the judge and address him by his name - and again apologize for that
outburst of mine. A couple of weeks later, on 8 April 1999, I had become
an inmate of Mannheim prison.

The following is a brief selection of the tragic stories that until now
have remained untold. Interestingly, all 100 contributors have given
their name and current residential addresses:

1. Maria Hesselbarth: Handed Over To Partisans…

My homeland was the Banat. I am Donauschwäbin (Germans
of Swabian descent along the Danube). Possibly, it has been public
knowledge what happened to us in 1944, after the Russians had captured
Yugoslavia. It is my homeland, but even at this time, it is impossible
for me to completely reiterate the horror we lived through at the end of
the war.
We could not flee, where could we go? We were helplessly handed over to
the Partisans. Our misfortune was the fact that we spoke German! Before
World War I, we belonged to Austria-Hungary; afterward our region was
divided between Hungary, Rumania and Yugoslavia.
When the Russians came after World War II, all of the new Communist
countries persecuted the so-called Ethnic Germans. But the worst ones of
all were the Partisans, the treacherous criminals who took everything
they wanted, letting nothing stand in their way. It was not so much the
Russian Army that ravaged through our countryside, but the murderers who
came from what is today called Kosovo and the surrounding areas, most of
them from Bosnia. Their brutality cannot be recounted!
As for myself, I was deported in 1944 to Russia, not alone, but with
thousands of others. Ethnic Germans from Hungary, Rumania and Eastern
Germany. There were 2,000 prisoners in a camp at Kriwoi Rog; half of
them perished from starvation. None of them were even given a decent
burial. Why should they be buried? They were only Ethnic Germans! No one
speaks publicly about them. On the contrary! It is deliberately silenced
about what happened to us!
The deported German civilian prisoners were mostly between the ages of
16 and 30. I was 23 years of age at the time. In the middle of winter,
we were transported inc cattle cars through Poland to Russia. We were
held prisoners in buildings without windows or beds. We heard nothing
about the families we had to leave behind. We were totally cut off from
our homeland and civilization. Until the end of 1947, we had to perform
inhuman slave labour on construction sites and saw mills.
Even then, we were not allowed to go home. The Communist dictator, Tito,
would not let us return to our homes. Rather, we were shipped to the
Communist Eastern Zone of Germany where we were not welcomes, because
all of us were in terrible physical and mental condition, sick and
emaciated. I suffered from tuberculosis, along with other ailments…Only
recently someone in the local newspaper, the Wiesbadener Kurier called
all the Germans who were forced into slave labor, to apply for
restitution. Unfortunately, we do not know to whom we can direct our
application. Hardly to the Russians! Maybe we can apply to the present
Government.
But it would make no sense! To get attention one would have to be a
foreign individual, not a German or an Ethnic German! Our rightful
concerns do not find an ear in our government. They pretend to be deaf.
Anyone who would stand up for the rights of German slave labors would
deserve our gratitude!
(Now: Faaker Strasse 11, D-65187 Wiesbaden, Germany)

2. Hildegard Fiedler: Brutal Rapes…

Forests and lakes surrounded my home village of
Mertenheim, County Lötzen in East Prussia. My mother, my brother (18
months) and I (18), had fled from the Russians on January 23, 1945. It
was bitter cold, and we waited many hours for the train. It never came.
We walked back home and fed out pigs and chickens. When we suddenly
heard a freight train stopping at the depot, we grabbed a few meager
belongings, ran across the fields and boarded the train.
Many refugees and a few soldiers were on the train. We departed, but had
to stop very often on the open fields. We proceeded extremely slowly. It
took us eight days until we came close to Heilsberg, about 50 kilometers
from our village. We were stranded again on an open field and were told:
‘Save yourselves if you can, the Russians are here!’
The children began to cry, and all of us were panic-stricken. In a
village, about one kilometer away, we found shelter in a house. We slept
in one room on the floor with 20 other refugees. A short time later, it
seemed to us that the whole village was burning. I looked briefly
through the window, and was hit by grenade splinters on my head and
chest. I fell down, unconscious. One of the women made a makeshift
bandage.
Towards evening, the first Russians entered the house. They did not harm
us,, but the next day they were cruel and horrible. The women had to
endure brutal rapes, often accompanied by ceaseless clubbing with the
butts of their guns, until they were unconscious. Their clothes were
slit open from top to bottom. No amount of crying or begging helped! It
went on day and night…
(Now: Marktstrasse 14, D-06686 Lützen, Germany)

3. Vera Heger-Glatz: March Of Death Through Prague …

The fortress of Breslau was already in Russian hands on
May 6, 1945, when we got an official order to bring the women, children
and old people to a safe place. My mother, along with us three sisters
(16, 14 and 12), lived in Habelschwerdt in Grafschaft Glatz. Even before
we began our exodus, our mother tried to explain to us the horrifying
effects of possible rapes.
An evacuation route through the Sudetenland was still accessible at the
time, but it became our misfortune.
Prior to our arrival in the city of Prague, we got a message, ‘You will
be sent back home.’ But soon many of the Czechs stood along both sides
of the road, spitting and cursing at us. They threw stones at us, and we
were beaten and chased. The closer we came to the city, the worse it
got. A little German boy sat crying on the side of the street, calling
for his mother. While I watched, a Czech walked up to him with a few
rude words, and then shot him dead. A forest ranger walking ahead of us
carried his dachshund. His pet was ripped from his arm and the dog was
beaten to death before his eyes.
We ran for our lives, and threw away our last bundles to run faster. The
Czechs had plundered most of our belongings earlier on. We saw many
desperate Germans vaulting across the railings into the river. Mother
and I still tried hard to keep our family together. ..
(Now: Elbuferstrasse 41, D- 21436 Marschacht 1)

4. Liselotte Meyer: Free To Plunder

The first news of the approaching Soviet tanks came to
Köslin in Hinterpommern on March 1, 1945. Since we had not received an
order to evacuate, we were surprised while we were at work. A few of our
fellow townsmen fled, but returned later on, often without their baggage
because the war front had come threateningly close. Some of them had to
leave relatives behind because they could no longer walk. We never heard
of their fate. Many children died during these ordeals, and had to be
buried along the route.
On March 4, 1945, we saw the first Russians, after we had hidden in a
room in a cellar below the workshop of a locksmith shop. A few of the
Russian officers tried to rape a 12-year old girl, but her mother was
able to escape with her and her deaf son. Unfortunately, near our
hideout, a boy fell into a mill brook and began to shriek terribly, and
they were re-captured. Not satisfied with them, two other women were
taken along and raped by the Russians.
Another 12-year old girl escaped while her mother struggled valiantly
against a Russian, suffering a severe beating with the butt of his
machine gun. We no longer felt safe in our hideout and returned to our
small apartment, sheltering four other women with us. At night we slept
fully clothed, eight people in two beds and one cot.
During the daytime, the Russians constantly molested us…
(Now: Hoheluft 1, D- 24768 Rendsburg, Germany)

5. Anna Bank: Miscarriage After Rape…

A short time before the Russians invaded our village, we
were ordered to flee to Danzig. An East Prussian woman, who sought
shelter with is, was hit and killed by enemy fire. The Russian troops
came in late afternoon. Another woman and her daughter, who had fled
from Küssow in fear of the Russians, were also staying with us. They
became terrified and crawled under the bed, where they stayed all night.
The rapes began right away! Very few females escaped. Our 13-year old
daughter and a 12-year old girl from Küssow dressed in men’s clothes and
shoved their hair under a cap. It saved them from the brutish Russians.
It was a different story for my sister-in-law from Lauenburg, who had
found asylum with her three children in our home. The women, who tried
to defend themselves, were shot to death. Everything was stolen, without
any consideration for our basic needs. The Russians loaded all of our
food supplies on a wagon and carried them away.
At that time, 21 people lived in our house. When things seemed to quiet
down just a little, a woman from Küssow dared to walk back to look after
her close relatives. She learned that her parents and siblings, ten
people in all, had drowned in a pond, driven to suicide by the extreme
horror and desperation…
(Now: Haus#18, S-D23996 Dambeck, Germany)

6. Brigitte K Gabriel: Shot And Killed After
Interrogation…

I was born in 1930, in Buschwinkel near Schlochau, at
the beautiful farm of my ancestors. During the bitter cold winter of
1945, inundated by huge snowstorms, the stream of fleeing people who
sought refuge in our house never ceased. On February 22, 1945, just
before the Russian Army broke through, we escaped with a horse-drawn
vehicle to Klein-Karzenburg, County Rummelsburg. Mr Fedke, the shoemaker
from Stretzin, with his wife and two children, came with us. Later,
after severe interrogations by a Russian woman commissioner, my father
and Mr Fedke were shot to death.
The rest of us were plundered and chased into a nearby forest. At that
time, a woman was shot and killed right at my feet because she was
physically unable to follow a mounted Russian officer. I was able to
crawl away and hide in a dense thicket; now I was all by myself. From a
nearby knoll, I saw reddish-coloured skies in every direction. The
village of Bublitz, Forst, Baldenburg, Karzenburg were all in flames.
In my loneliness I did not even feel hunger or frost, just mortal terror
deep inside me! It would never quite leave me during my entire life…
(Now: 1038 East Vargo Lane, Arlington Heights, Il 60004, USA)

7. Margarete Dimke: Beaten To Death…

I was born in 1917 in a village near Breslau. My father
owned a small farm, which he was able to expand over several years. It
was lots of work for us, but we enjoyed it, and we were happy when
everything greened up and bloomed around us. In 1939, the unfortunate
war began, and then came January of 1945. The Russian Army stood at the
doors of Breslau, and the population of our village fled towards the
Grafschaft Glatz, a former earldom. But we all retuned on May 9, 1945,
when the war ended.
The Poles arrived and began to take possession of our village. We were
disowned and became slave laborers for them, without even receiving a
zloty for wages. Our German money became invalid. We did not know how to
survive. My brother caught sparrows; we cooked nettles and collected
wild herbs. I was fortunate enough to get work from the Russians, which
helped a little. I got a few zlotys for it and bought a piece of soap.
At least we could wash ourselves.
My father was dragged into a torture cellar in Breslau and nearly
clubbed to death. These torture cellars were in almost every street of
our metropolis, and the loud screams of the tormented Germans could be
heard on the streets. The butts of firearms thundered on our doors many
times, and we were plundered again and again. The German girls fled into
the fields to escape the ravages of the rapists…
(Now: Johann-Jakob-Rieger-Strasse 6, D-67149, Germany)

The current feeding frenzy as to what the AAZF has done in Iraq prisons
pales into farce when one reads the brief testimonies of individuals –
still alive – who have graphically written first-hand accounts of the
horrors that Germans, particularly women and girls, have had to endure
as they fled from advancing Soviet soldiers. In the above volume there
is no mention of the rapes and abuse suffered by women and girls living
in the western sector under French control.

A nation that does not protect the honour of its women is destined to
disintegrate into a mess of consumer-driven hedonism where money and
other material goods defines their mindset without any self-reflection.
Such is the shame of the Germans who have succumbed to a mutated
perspective of their own self. Rudi Maskus’s book re-kindles moral
values lost to those Germans who are riding the consumer bubble like an
express train out of control. It is worse when a nation does not honour
its fallen soldiers!

German Hatred in Australia

In Australia we have the public broadcaster giving
saturation cover to all things Jewish, and there is not a day when
something about the ‘Holocaust’ or some story detailing the anguish
experienced by some ‘Holocaust’ survivor is not aired. Never, never has
there been a program that details the horrors experienced by Germans.
But then I forget, the ‘Holocaust’ is pure German hatred, and thus
Germans do not deserve any empathetic understanding because they were
the perpetrators and not the victims of any crimes; in fact, if Germans
suffered, they deserved it!

Slowly, albeit in a perverse way, there are now writers in Germany who
are slowly opening the Pandora box of suffering. Here is the
advertisement as displayed by the public broadcaster ABC Radio:

Thor Kunkel
Is fiction an effective place to challenge cultural blind-spots? Should
novelists take responsibility when their works of fiction cause
disturbances in the 'real world'? These questions loom large this week
on Books & Writing as journalist Zulfikar Abbany examines the
controversy surrounding the new novel from German author Thor Kunkel
called Endstufe or Final Stage.

There has been widespread criticism in Germany of this new book, not
only because it suggests the Nazis were involved in a trade in
pornographic films, but because it also makes the claim that Germany and
the Nazis don't have a monopoly on evil. Moreover, Thor Kunkel says that
a failure to recognise evil as a widespread human failing dooms us to
repeat terrible acts of the past.

That's on Books & Writing with Ramona Koval ...Sunday, 23 May 2004, at
1.05 Sunday afternoon and repeated on Tuesday afternoon at 2.30 ... on
Radio National.

John Weir reflects

“Personally, I find it bizarre that anyone believes
the reality of the extermination of six million Jews can be determined
based on the interpretation of the intent of a single German word. If
Hitler meant "murder the Jews", then it is all true. If he meant
”breaking their political power" or something other than murder, then it
isn't. Isn't this approach backward? There is a line in a Talking Heads
song that goes: "Saying it don't make it so." This demonstrates the
poverty of the evidence for the Holocaust. Why would anyone need to
split hairs over the intent of a single word to determine the character
of an historical event? In any event, we are not going to find an answer
to this question in a dictionary. I have seen this semantic debate go on
for at least 20 years. It is time to move on.”

----- Original Message -----
From: Ola Misvær
Sent: Friday, May 14, 2004 7:58 PM
Subject: The real reason for the war against Iraq

Dear Sirs:
Ala Bashir was the private physician for Saddam Hussein through the last
20 years. Now he has written a book "Saddam's Confident" about his
experiences with the leader of Iraq.
Most important is the fact that Saddam used his last time in writing
books. And the very last one has the title "Out! You are cursed" against
the Jews. The MS was ready to be printed in the Ministry of Culture when
Bagdad fell.
The real reason for the Jewish war against Iraq was the fact that Saddam
Hussein and his sons were antisemites. Uday was brave enough to edit a
newspaper where the fact that plutocrat Jews are in power in the US was
expounded upon.
By the way Le Monde International has revealed that Iraq will be a
paradise for speculators and liberal capitalism. After all the American
soldiers were told that they are fighting for "democracy AND market
economy". Moreover, already a year ago the American conquerors stated
that all the industries of Iraq might be bought up by foreign
capitalists.
Sincerely, Ola Misvær

About Bashir:
http://www.cnn.com/TRANSCRIPTS/0304/29/ltm.14.html
P.S. The International Red Cross has just pointed out that between 70
and 90 percent of the prisoners in the Abu Ghraib prison have been
arrested at random and are totally innocent. Therefore even the skimpy
"justification" for the torture against the prisoners (that the
interrogators thus are able to extract "important information" from the
Iraqis) is totally bogus. The war monger Bush and his Jewish advisors
ought to be put before an International War Crimes Tribunal!

WASHINGTON - Almost 10,000 prisoners from President George W. Bush's
so-called war on terror are being held around the world in secretive
American-run jails and interrogation centres similar to the notorious
Abu Ghraib Prison. Some of these detention centres are so sensitive that
even the most senior members of the United States Congress have no idea
where they are.
From Iraq to Afghanistan to Cuba, this American gulag is driven by the
pressure to obtain "actionable" intelligence from prisoners captured by
US forces. The systematic practice of holding prisoners without access
to lawyers or their families, together with a willingness to use
"coercive interrogation" techniques, suggests the abuse of prisoners at
Abu Ghraib now shocking the world could be widespread.
Iraq has become a holding pen for America's prisoners from 21 countries,
according to a report from the international campaign group Human Rights
Watch. The US military is keeping prisoners at 10 centres, most of which
were used by Saddam Hussein's regime. The total in January was 8968, and
is thought to have increased.
Prisoners are being held from, among other countries, Algeria, Egypt,
India, Iran, Iraq, the Palestinian territories, Jordan, Lebanon, Libya,
Malaysia, Oman, Saudi Arabia, Somalia, Sudan, Syria, Sweden, Tunisia,
Turkey, Ukraine, the United Kingdom and Yemen.
A report in the Washington Post has revealed that up to 8000 Iraqi
prisoners are being held at Abu Ghraib, the jail west of Baghdad also
known as the Baghdad Central Correctional Facility or BCCF, and nine
other facilities inside Iraq. It is impossible to know for sure because
the Pentagon refuses to provide complete information.
Officials say prisoners range from those accused of petty crimes to
detainees believed to be involved in attacks on US forces, though it is
increasingly clear that many hundreds are simply Iraqi civilians swept
up in raids by US and British soldiers.
Military and diplomatic sources say a number of detainees were taken to
Iraq from Afghanistan. In Afghanistan, the US military still holds 300
or more prisoners at Bagram, north of Kabul, and at facilities in
Kandahar, Jalalabad and Asadabad.
The CIA, meanwhile, runs an interrogation centre in Kabul that is known
by special forces and others simply as "The Pit". At Guantanamo Bay,
more than 600 prisoners remain incarcerated more than two years after
they were captured in the aftermath of the US operation against the
Taleban. Last week the US admitted that two guards at the camp had been
disciplined for using "excessive force" against prisoners.
Michael Ratner, vice-president of the New York-based Centre for
Constitutional Rights, which has represented many of the Guantanamo
prisoners, said yesterday it was clear that a pattern was emerging. "To
me it means they are breaching international law as well as domestic
law. The treatment is obviously illegal," he said. "It puts what is
happening in Iraq into perspective. The idea that just a few soldiers
came up with this is inconceivable. It has come from very high up in the
Administration."
From interviews with relatives and lawyers for the seven US soldiers
facing courts-martial for the Abu Ghraib abuse, there is growing
evidence that their actions were encouraged and even ordered by Military
Intelligence and privately contracted interrogators to "soften up" the
prisoners. Major General Geoffrey Miller, formerly the warden at
Guantanamo Bay, took control of Abu Ghraib last year with a plan to turn
it into a hub of interrogation. He placed the military police under the
tactical control of the 205th Military Intelligence Brigade.
The lawyers representing Lynddie England, the 21-year-old woman from the
372nd Military Police Company who was caught in photographs sexually
humiliating hooded Iraqi prisoners and leading one by a lead, insisted
she was following orders. The pictures were a deliberate part of the
humiliation, they said. "People told Pfc England, 'Hold that leash' ...
told her to smile, so they can show the photos to subsequent prisoners,"
said lawyer Carl McGuire. Another member of her legal team, Rose Mary
Zapor, said: "They picked her to get the smallest, youngest, lowest-rank
woman they could find and that would increase the humiliation for an
Iraqi man." This claim is supported by two members the 205th Military
Intelligence Brigade, assigned to Abu Ghraib, who on their arrival
immediately realised what was taking place was illegal.
The soldiers said beatings were meted out with the full knowledge of
intelligence interrogators, who let military police know which prisoners
were co-operating with them and which were not. A leaked report by the
International Committee of the Red Cross, the only outside body
permitted to visit the prison, also confirmed widespread ill-treatment
and abuse that the authorities failed to stop. It estimated that up to
90 per cent of the prisoners had been "arrested by mistake". –
INDEPENDENT

For nearly 12 years, Staff Sgt. Jimmy Massey was a
hard-core, some say gung-ho, Marine. For three years he trained fellow
Marines in one of the most grueling indoctrination rituals in military
life - Marine boot camp.
The Iraq war changed Massey. The brutality, the sheer carnage of the
U.S. invasion, touched his conscience and transformed him forever. He
was honorably discharged with full severance last Dec. 31 and is now
back in his hometown, Waynsville, N.C. When I talked with Massey last
week, he expressed his remorse at the civilian loss of life in incidents
in which he himself was involved.

Q: You spent 12 years in the Marines. When were you sent to Iraq?

A: I went to Kuwait around Jan. 17. I was in Iraq from
the get-go. And I was involved in the initial invasion.

Q: What does the public need to know about your
experiences as a Marine?

A: The cause of the Iraqi revolt against the American
occupation. What they need to know is we killed a lot of innocent
people. I think at first the Iraqis had the understanding that
casualties are a part of war. But over the course of time, the
occupation hurt the Iraqis. And I didn't see any humanitarian support.

Q: What experiences turned you against the war and made
you leave the Marines?

A: I was in charge of a platoon that consists of machine
gunners and missile men. Our job was to go into certain areas of the
towns and secure the roadways. There was this one particular incident –
and there's many more - the one that really pushed me over the edge. It
involved a car with Iraqi civilians. From all the intelligence reports
we were getting, the cars were loaded down with suicide bombs or
material. That's the rhetoric we received from intelligence. They came
upon our checkpoint. We fired some warning shots. They didn't slow down.
So we lit them up.

Q: Lit up? You mean you fired machine guns?

A: Right. Every car that we lit up we were expecting
ammunition to go off. But we never heard any. Well, this particular
vehicle we didn't destroy completely, and one gentleman looked up at me
and said: "Why did you kill my brother? We didn't do anything wrong."
That hit me like a ton of bricks.

Q: He spoke English?

A: Oh, yeah.

Q: Baghdad was being bombed. The civilians were trying
to get out, right?

A: Yes. They received pamphlets, propaganda we dropped
on them. It said, "Just throw up your hands, lay down weapons." That's
what they were doing, but we were still lighting them up. They weren't
in uniform. We never found any weapons.

Q: You got to see the bodies and casualties?

A: Yeah, firsthand. I helped throw them in a ditch.

Q: Over what period did all this take place?

A: During the invasion of Baghdad. 'We lit him up pretty
good'

Q: How many times were you involved in checkpoint
"light-ups"?

A: Five times. There was [the city of] Rekha. The
gentleman was driving a stolen work utility van. He didn't stop. With us
being trigger happy, we didn't really give this guy much of a chance. We
lit him up pretty good. Then we inspected the back of the van. We found
nothing. No explosives.

Q: The reports said the cars were loaded with
explosives. In all the incidents did you find that to be the case?

A: Never. Not once. There were no secondary explosions.
As a matter of fact, we lit up a rally after we heard a stray gunshot.

Q: A demonstration? Where?

A: On the outskirts of Baghdad. Near a military
compound. There were demonstrators at the end of the street. They were
young and they had no weapons. And when we rolled onto the scene, there
was already a tank that was parked on the side of the road. If the
Iraqis wanted to do something, they could have blown up the tank. But
they didn't. They wereonly holding a demonstration. Down at the end of
the road, we saw some RPGs (rocket-propelled grenades) lined up against
the wall. That put us at ease because we thought: "Wow, if they were
going to blow us up, they would have done it."

Q: Were the protest signs in English or Arabic?

A: Both.

Q: Who gave the order to wipe the demonstrators out?

A: Higher command. We were told to be on the lookout for
the civilians because a lot of the Fedayeen and the Republican Guards
had tossed away uniforms and put on civilian clothes and were mounting
terrorist attacks on American soldiers. The intelligence reports that
were given to us were basically known by every member of the chain of
command. The rank structure that was implemented in Iraq by the chain of
command was evident to every Marine in Iraq. The order to shoot the
demonstrators, I believe, came from senior government officials,
including intelligence communities within the military and the U.S.
government.

Q: What kind of firepower was employed?

A: M-16s, 50-cal. machine guns.

Q: You fired into six or ten kids? Were they all taken
out?

A: Oh, yeah. Well, I had a "mercy" on one guy. When we
rolled up, he was hiding behind a concrete pillar. I saw him and raised
my weapon up, and he put up his hands. He ran off. I told everybody,
"Don't shoot." Half of his foot was trailing behind him. So he was
running with half of his foot cut off.

Q: After you lit up the demonstration, how long before
the next incident?

A: Probably about one or two hours. This is another
thing, too. I am so glad I am talking with you, because I suppressed all
of this.

Q: Well, I appreciate you giving me the information, as
hard as it must be to recall the painful details.

A: That's all right. It's kind of therapy for me.
Because it's something that I had repressed for a long time.

Q: And the incident?

A: There was an incident with one of the cars. We shot
an individual with his hands up. He got out of the car. He was badly
shot. We lit him up. I don't know who started shooting first. One of the
Marines came running over to where we were and said: "You all just shot
a guy with his hands up." Man, I forgot about this.
Depleted uranium and cluster bombs

Q: You mention machine guns. What can you tell me about
cluster bombs, or depleted uranium?

A: Depleted uranium. I know what it does. It's basically
like leaving plutonium rods around. I'm 32 years old. I have 80 percent
of my lung capacity. I ache all the time. I don't feel like a healthy
32-year-old.

Q: Were you in the vicinity of of depleted uranium?

A: Oh, yeah. It's everywhere. DU is everywhere on the
battlefield. If you hit a tank, there's dust.

Q: Did you breath any dust?

A: Yeah.

Q: And if DU is affecting you or our troops, it's
impacting Iraqi civilians.

A: Oh, yeah. They got a big wasteland problem.

Q: Do Marines have any precautions about dealing with DU?

A: Not that I know of. Well, if a tank gets hit, crews
are detained for a little while to make sure there are no signs or
symptoms. American tanks have depleted uranium on the sides, and the
projectiles have DU in them. If an enemy vehicle gets hit, the area gets
contaminated. Dead rounds are in the ground. The civilian populace is
just now starting to learn about it. Hell, I didn't even know about DU
until two years ago. You know how I found out about it? I read an
article in Rolling Stone magazine. I just started inquiring about it,
and I said "Holy s---!"

Q: Cluster bombs are also controversial. U.N.
commissions have called for a ban. Were you acquainted with cluster
bombs?

A: I had one of my Marines in my battalion who lost his
leg from an ICBM.

Q: What's an ICBM?

A: A multi-purpose cluster bomb.

Q: What happened?

A: He stepped on it. We didn't get to training about
clusters until about a month before I left.

Q: What kind of training?

A: They told us what they looked like, and not to step
on them.

Q: Were you in any areas where they were dropped?

A: Oh, yeah. They were everywhere.

Q: Dropped from the air?

A: From the air as well as artillery.

Q: Are they dropped far away from cities, or inside the
cities?

A: They are used everywhere. Now if you talked to a
Marine artillery officer, he would give you the runaround, the
politically correct answer. But for an average grunt, they're
everywhere.

Q: Including inside the towns and cities?

A: Yes, if you were going into a city, you knew there
were going to be ICBMs.

Q: Cluster bombs are anti-personnel weapons. They are
not precise. They don't injure buildings, or hurt tanks. Only people and
living things. There are a lot of undetonated duds and they go off after
the battles are over.

A: Once the round leaves the tube, the cluster bomb has
a mind of its own. There's always human error. I'm going to tell you:
The armed forces are in a tight spot over there. It's starting to leak
out about the civilian casualties that are taking place. The Iraqis
know. I keep hearing reports from my Marine buddies inside that there
were 200-something civilians killed in Fallujah. The military is
scrambling right now to keep the raps on that. My understanding is
Fallujah is just littered with civilian bodies.
Embedded reporters Q: How are the embedded reporters responding? A: I
had embedded reporters in my unit, not my platoon. One we had was a
South African reporter. He was scared s---less. We had an incident where
one of them wanted to go home.

Q: Why?

A: It was when we started going into Baghdad. When he
started seeing the civilian casualties, he started wigging out a little
bit. It didn't start until we got on the outskirts of Baghdad and
started taking civilian casualties.

Q: I would like to go back to the first incident, when
the survivor asked why did you kill his brother. Was that the incident
that pushed you over the edge, as you put it?

A: Oh, yeah. Later on I found out that was a typical
day. I talked with my commanding officer after the incident. He came up
to me and says: "Are you OK?" I said: "No, today is not a good day. We
killed a bunch of civilians." He goes: "No, today was a good day." And
when he said that, I said "Oh, my goodness, what the hell am I into?"

Q: Your feelings changed during the invasion. What was
your state of mind before the invasion?

A: I was like every other troop. My president told me
they got weapons of mass destruction, that Saddam threatened the free
world, that he had all this might and could reach us anywhere. I just
bought into the whole thing.

Q: What changed you?

A: The civilian casualties taking place. That was what
made the difference. That was when I changed.

Q: Did the revelations that the government fabricated
the evidence for war affect the troops?

A: Yes. I killed innocent people for our government. For
what? What did I do? Where is the good coming out of it? I feel like
I've had a hand in some sort of evil lie at the hands of our government.
I just feel embarrassed, ashamed about it. Showdown with superiors

Q: I understand that all the incidents – killing
civilians at checkpoints, itchy fingers at the rally - weigh on you.
What happened with your commanding officers? How did you deal with them?

A: There was an incident. It was right after the fall of
Baghdad, when we went back down south. On the outskirts of Karbala, we
had a morning meeting on the battle plan. I was not in a good mindset.
All these things were going through my head - about what we were doing
over there. About some of the things my troops were asking. I was
holding it all inside. My lieutenant and I got into a conversation. The
conversation was striking me wrong. And I lashed out. I looked at him
and told him: "You know, I honestly feel that what we're doing is wrong
over here. We're committing genocide." He asked me something and I said
that with the killing of civilians and the depleted uranium we're
leaving over here, we're not going to have to worry about terrorists. He
didn't like that. He got up and stormed off. And I knew right then and
there that my career was over. I was talking to my commanding officer.

Q: What happened then?

A: After I talked to the top commander, I was kind of
scurried away. I was basically put on house arrest. I didn't talk to
other troops. I didn't want to hurt them. I didn't want to jeopardize
them. I want to help people. I felt strongly about it. I had to say
something. When I was sent back to stateside, I went in front of the
sergeant major. He's in charge of 3,500-plus Marines. "Sir," I told him,
"I don't want your money. I don't want your benefits. What you did was
wrong."
It was just a personal conviction with me. I've had an impeccable
career. I chose to get out. And you know who I blame? I blame the
president of the U.S. It's not the grunt. I blame the president because
he said they had weapons of mass destruction. It was a lie.

<snip>
Only someone who is anti-Semitic constantly refers to Jews as Zionists.
<snip>
This statement is completely untrue - it should read:
"Only someone who is ignorant constantly refers to Jews as Zionists."
The failure here is in the differentiation between Jews and Zionists -
they are not the same.
Jews are a people born to or choosing the Jewish faith, who may live in
Israel or may live in any other country of the world. They may be
genetically linked to ancient Hebrew bloodlines, or they may be converts
from any other genetic stock. They may be Orthodox (as in strictly
observant of Judaic religious practices) or they may be secular Jews (
as in many of the Sharon government - who are only nominally
(politically convenient) Orthodox).
Zionists are not necessarily Jews, although the majority surely are.
Zionists are proponents, some could claim and justify calling them
'fanatics', for the establishment of a mythical State of Israel in the
Middle East called Zion. In the early years this fanaticism was entirely
religious in nature, and still had some ethics and honour: i.e. even the
leadership were able to distinguish acts of evil when they were carried
out, but they justified these acts as necessary to the founding of the
State of Zion.
<snip>
"Why should the Arabs make peace? If I were an Arab leader, I would
never make terms with Israel. That is natural: we have taken their
country. Sure, God promised it to us, but what does that matter to them?
There has been anti-Semitism, the Nazis, Hitler, Auschwitz, but was that
their fault? They only see one thing: we came here and stole their
country. Why should they accept that?"
- David Ben Gurion, the founding Prime Minister of Israel.
<snip>
In the recent past there has been a swing to fanatical fascism in
Israeli affairs, and this is the root of the soubriquet "Zionist" as a
pejorative.
When you complain that all references to "zionists" are anti-Semitic you
are mistaken. Many Jews, both inside Israel and in the rest of the
world, are committed anti-Zionists, and they are shamed and angry by the
way Zionists have hijacked the Jewish religion in the cause of their
fascism. It is an irony of the use of the term "anti-Semite" that Arabs
of the Middle East are themselves Semites in many cases, and could
therefore fall on either side of the insult - as can Zionists - who
themselves can frequently be termed 'anti-Semite' for hating Arabs.
One of the nastiest Zionists habits I can cite, is their willingness to
vilify people of their own race with the term "Self-Hating Jew" - once
you sit and think about this for a few minutes you can clearly see how
psychotically disturbed Zionists really are.
Clearly we cannot use the term anti-Semite anymore as the semantic and
cultural meanings are just not understood by the majority of people.
I constantly refer to "Zionists" (when I am dealing *with* Zionists).
There is usually no ambiguity between the terms "Jew" and "Zionist"...
it is only a question of the individuals politics that make the
distinction.

I despise Zionists for their theft of the ancient honour of the Jews,
for the manipulation of the Jewish world community for political ends,
for their descent into a fascism every bit as nasty as the fascists in
Germany who they claim to be opposing.... On the other hand, I enjoy and
appreciate the cultural and academic benefits which World Jewry has
gifted this world. Individuals are good and bad, but racial groups
cannot be so easily defined this way.... Jews have 'tendencies' just
like any other 'race' - some of these tendencies are fabulous, some are
not. I, and I hope you, are mature enough to know and live with this
ambiguity...... As we ourselves have the same type of strengths and
weaknesses we can hardly be justified in vilifying other groups, can we?
Zionism, however, is not a racial grouping, it is a political grouping -
and as we know, political groupings very often can be seen to be evil,
or dangerous, or depraved. Zionism is bordering on all of these
adjectives. I strongly resent and oppose Zionism, but I am not an
"anti-Semite (and I don't recognise this definition anyway)
Sincerely,
Henry Balfour (yes, it is 'that' family.)
Sydney, Australia
p.s. Why is it that most e-mail written by the average American is
littered with grammar and spelling errors? Do they not have spell
checkers in Microsoft products over there?
A White Holocaust in South Africa?
http://www.stopboergenocide.com

Peter: The New Left imposes "Outcomes-based"
teaching methods, in which school teachers are required to prepare a
lesson-plan for each lesson, showing what students will learn in it.
These goals are the "Outcomes".

Alain: I taught at high school level back in the
days when every classroom in the State of Victoria (Australia) was meant
to go through the same bit of the course, using the same pages of the
textbook(s), at pretty much the same pace. Even then, we had to do
lesson plans as part of our teacher training. A good thing, too! Those
teachers who continued to use lesson plans tended to continue to engage
the students. The lazy teachers effectively allowed the textbooks -
which were often appalling - to usurp their own classroom role as
educators.

Peter: The old method used in schools was
"Syllabus-based", in which the course was based on one or more
textbooks, and there was no need for teachers to prepare lesson-plans
because the textbooks contained the material anyway; this method is
still used in the universities. Since each student had a textbook,
students could catch up or go ahead on their own.

Alain: Of course this method isn't "still used in
universities" - well, at least not in proper universities in Australia.
There is a reading list provided to students (usually much more than
"one or more textbooks"), and these texts are then discussed in
lectures, tutorials and seminars. Sometimes totally conflicting views
are presented through the reading list, and the task of the academic is
to guide the students in coming to their own independent assessments of
the value of the source material.
It is a sad fact that some academics hide behind this process in order
to promote their own views. (I could give names and addresses!) But it
is also true that some of them are objective and stick to their aims of
"drawing out" the students' understanding, which is the notion at the
heart of "education" - Latin "educare". (Again, I could give names and
addresses.)
There will always be the odd bad egg in any workforce. But if the stated
goal of education is to enable students to think for themselves, most
educators will at least pay lip-service to this goal. On the other hand,
if the purpose is simply to cover a particular textbook, that is a
recipe for group-think.

Peter: It's a no-brainer. The standards in
Syllabus-based teaching are much higher;
Alain: No, they're much lower in the form of teaching envisaged by
Peter. A teacher who uses rational curriculum planning, with some way of
assessing how far the students have progressed, is always going to be on
his/her toes. Someone who just follows the prescribed textbook has
abdicated the role of teacher and is just a functionary of the system -
effectively an underpaid propagandist.

Peter: it's easier for the teacher;

Alain: The teacher should be the servant and
custodian of the children in his/her intellectual charge. I doubt that
any serious parent cares about what's "easier for the teacher"!

Peter: and there isn't the same imposition of
political correctness on the student.

Alain: But to make kids follow some textbook
imposed on the educational system by a government that pays teachers'
salaries is a guaranteed recipe for imposing political correctness. The
alternative is to encourage the kids to become bold free-thinkers who
understand logic and who can evaluate the evidence for themselves.

Peter: The older way used whole-class methods,
whereas the new way splits up the class into encounter groups of 5 or 6
which are supposed to reach consensus decisions on topics, and then
report back to the class as a whole.

Alain: Another good thing! Instead of treating
all the kids in the class as being more or less identical and
interchangeable, and therefore using "lock-step" pedagogy, the
intelligent and responsible teacher will try to use whatever method
helps all the individual students to learn to think and evaluate and
decide for themselves. They all have different abilities, and also
different levels of ability, and the genuine teacher's challenge is to
unlock the potential in every white kid.

Peter: This is a "bottom-up" method, reversing
the "teacher-directed" method of the old way, just as in China's
Cultural Revolution the students gave political instruction to their
former teachers.

Alain: Rubbish! The attempt to genuinely educate
students or pupils (meaning to draw them out) is always
"teacher-directed". The Chinese "Cultural Revolution" was the result of
vile propaganda imposed on the peasant students by the Communist central
government. And the cadres didn't usually give "political instruction to
their former teachers" - mostly, they just killed them!

Peter: But this method imposes pressures to
conform to the majority view among the students. It stifles the
independent scholar.

Alain: This statement couldn't be more
wrong-headed. Either we educate white kids, making them independent
thinkers; or we subject them to the tyranny of the "sacred" text. In
East Germany the old litany may have been something like: "Glorious Marx
wrote this book. Read it and digest it." In China it may have been:
"Blessed and beloved comrade Chairman Mao wrote this book. Etc". In
America it might have been: "Susan Sonntag wrote this revelation from
heaven. Etc". In Canada it might be: "Some Jew wrote a book claiming
that millions of his family were killed by Germans. Etc." In Australia
under the previous government it would have been: "Professor Manning
Clark and Dr Henry Reynolds wrote these books about how ashamed we
should be for being White Australians. Read them and digest them - and
feel guilty for the rest of your lives!"

Peter: The East Asian countries use the old
methods we in the West have thrown away.

Alain: I hope so. Those methods are a recipe for
destroying the intellectual capital of the next generation.